| Literature DB >> 35368961 |
Shaoli Lin1, Shiyun Wang2, Juan Zhang3, Min Zhuang4, Zhen Meng5, Jianhua Liu6.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study is to detect the clinical efficacy of Jiedu Pingsou Decoction combined with azithromycin in the treatment of children with mycoplasma pneumonia and the effect on inflammatory factors and immune function in children.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35368961 PMCID: PMC8970864 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9102727
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Comparison of general data of two groups of children.
| Groups | Control group | Observation group |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.06 | ||
| Male | 21 | 20 | |
| Female | 13 | 14 | |
| Age | 7.32 ± 2.13 | 7.29 ± 2.10 | 0.95 |
| Course of disease | 6.26 ± 1.21 | 6.24 ± 1.23 | 0.92 |
Comparison of clinical efficacy between the two groups of patients.
| Group | Significantly effective | Effective | Ineffective | Effective efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 14 | 14 | 6 | 82.35 |
| Observation group | 17 | 15 | 2 | 94.12 |
Comparison of clinical symptom scores between the two groups before and after treatment.
| Group | Cough | Fever | Pulmonary rales | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | |
| Observation group | 2.06 ± 0.72 | 0.62 ± 0.11 | 1.89 ± 0.77 | 0.43 ± 0.15 | 1.89 ± 0.63 | 0.67 ± 0.24 |
| Control group | 1.98 ± 0.75 | 1.25 ± 0.35 | 2.16 ± 0.81 | 1.22 ± 0.49 | 2.05 ± 0.82 | 1.51 ± 0.67 |
| T | 0.44 | 10.02 | 1.41 | 9.09 | 0.91 | 9.42 |
| P | 0.66 | <0.001 | 0.16 | <0.001 | 0.37 | <0.001 |
Figure 1Comparison of T cell subset levels before and after treatment in children with mycoplasma pneumonia in two groups.
Comparison of the levels of inflammatory factors in the two groups of patients.
| Groups | Times | WBC (×109 L−1) | IL-6/(ng·mL−1) | IL-10/(ng·mL−1) | IFN- | TNF-ɑ/(ng·mL−1) | CRP (ng·mL−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | On admission | 9.03 ± 2.81 | 20.68 ± 4.31 | 36.75 ± 6.85 | 26.87 ± 4.73 | 2.72 ± 0.53 | 13.42 ± 2.96 |
| 1 week later | 9.08 ± 2.83 | 17.98 ± 5.03 | 29.35 ± 4.23 | 21.75 ± 4.52 | 2.15 ± 0.42 | 11.23 ± 2.46 | |
| 2 weeks later | 8.98 ± 2.75 | 14.02 ± 5.22 | 21.84 ± 4.32 | 15.45 ± 3.85 | 1.44 ± 0.31 | 8.63 ± 1.85 | |
|
| |||||||
| Observation group | On admission | 8.90 ± 2.65 | 22.87 ± 4.87 | 38.01 ± 6.52 | 27.17 ± 4.85 | 2.91 ± 0.55 | 13.73 ± 3.03 |
| 1 week later | 8.65 ± 2.58 | 15.57 ± 3.99 | 22.06 ± 3.53 | 18.64 ± 4.03 | 1.83 ± 0.40 | 9.04 ± 1.31 | |
| 2 weeks later | 8.74 ± 2.63 | 11.06 ± 3.01 | 15.61 ± 3.21 | 11.13 ± 3.42 | 0.87 ± 0.14 | 3.41 ± 0.74 | |
Comparison of the incidence of adverse reactions.
| Groups | Vomit | Diarrhea | Mild rash | Adverse reaction rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 2 | 1 | 1 | 11.76 |
| Observation group | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5.88 |